We can usually learn much more from people whose views we share than from people whose views contradict our own Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position

Throughout human history, we have acquired information and knowledge largely through interactions with other humans. Some will agree with our preconceived beliefs and others will not. Inevitably, as we expand our circle, we expand the pool of people with whom we will disagree. Can we learn more from these people, though? Or will we learn more from discussion among those whom we agree? I argue the claim that we can usually learn much more from people whose views we share than from people whose views contradict our own is misguided. Rather, I believe that disagreement, so long as it is productive, can lead to greater understanding of a given issue.

Firstly, humans are highly susceptible to confirmation bias. We are inclined to accept information that reinforces preexisting beliefs and are more likely to disregard or object to information that challenges those beliefs. Thus, in interacting with people whose views we share, a feedback loop of one-sided information is likely to be created. That is, as two people exchange information that reinforces the same belief, it often only illuminates one side of an issue—the side you already agree with. Arguably, there is not much to be learned from only viewing an issue from the perspective you already subscribe to.

Of course, people who agree on an issue may have information from an opposing perspective and this can factor into a discussion between two people who agree. For example, if I hold the belief that abortion is permissible and I am discussing abortion with another people who also holds this belief, it’s very possible that we have both considered arguments for the impermissibility of abortion. Just because we agree, doesn’t mean we haven’t considered the disagreeing position. Thus, we may learn a great deal from our conversation. Here, however, I argue that the benefit of the interaction is increased due to the presence of conflicting or contradictory information. Even though the two people engaged in the discussion are ultimately in agreement, their joint position is strengthened by the fact that they have considered an opposing view.

Discussion with someone whom you disagree has the ability to challenge your existing views and broaden your understanding of an issue. I argue that we learn more when we are exposed to conflicting information, often through engagement with someone of a different perspective. When we converse primarily with people who share our views, we limit ourselves to a great deal of information. Moreover, we limit our understanding of the range of ways people view and experience the world and form opinions thereof. Understanding a contradictory perspective can provide insight beyond that pertaining to the issue itself and consideration of where a view comes from, rather than only the view itself, ultimately supports a greater grasp of the relevant view. That is, when we interact with people we disagree with, we aren’t only exposed to a different view but we are also exposed to a different way of reasoning about a particular topic.
Engagement of this sort needn’t lead to a change in opinion on either side in order to be productive. In fact, a valuable part of what we learn from talking to people who hold contradictory views are the ways that our own position may be stronger or weaker than we previously thought. Considering a different line of reasoning or having the other person object to your position can ultimately lead to greater understanding of the view you already hold. However, this benefit does hinge on the conditions of the discussion being productive.

Disagreement can become volatile and discussions reaching this level are unlikely to produce greater knowledge or understanding. Hence, there are cases in which discussion with someone you agree with can be more productive and thus lead to each person learning more than a hostile discussion between people who disagree. When people are unwilling to genuinely engage with an opposing argument, it is unlikely for anyone involved to learn much, if anything at all. It is thus imperative that discussions between those with contradicting views be good-intentioned and the people involved be open to persuasion, even if a change in view is not the end result. Sans these conditions, the claim that we can learn more from people we agree with does seem to provide a plausible account. In the end, however, what we can ultimately learn from discussion with those we do not agree can largely outweigh what can be learned from talking to those we do agree with.